Vodoriz Y. Y., Lemeshko A. V., Marchenko I. Y., Shundrik M. A., Tkachenko I. M., Kovalenko V. V.


About the author:

Vodoriz Y. Y., Lemeshko A. V., Marchenko I. Y., Shundrik M. A., Tkachenko I. M., Kovalenko V. V.



Type of article:

Scentific article


A significant indicator of the quality of treatment is how patient`s quality of life changes after treatment. Quantitative indicators of determining quality of life changes and the effectiveness of dental treatment are based on this indicator. The aim. The idea of this research was to identify changes in the quality of life of patients who require aesthetic and/or functional restoration of anterior teeth and to determine which aspects of quality of life are the most affected. Object and methods. The OHIP-49 questionnaire was used to determine the change in quality of life. Adults 18-24 years of age and young patients aged 25-44 years with the need to restore function and/or aesthetics of the frontal group teeth joined the survey. Each question could be answered differently, depending on the frequency of the problem: “very often”, “often”, “sometimes”, “almost never”, “never”, “I don’t know”. If the patient answered more than 9 “I don’t know” questions, his questionnaire was excluded from further study. Each of the 49 questions had its own index valued from 0.747 to 2.555, which was multiplied by the frequency of occurrence of the problem (4, 3, 2, 1, 0 points, respectively). The points were calculated both for each block and for the whole. When asked the questionnaire, patients were asked to consider whether or not there was a problem within 12 months before their questioning. In the end, the results of the experimental group were compared with those of the control group. Results and discussing. Survey data revealed that the average of the total points scored in the study group was 63.07 ± 6.79. The mean score among men was slightly less than for women (51.21 ± 5.98 vs 78.10 ± 12.63); P = 0.048. In the control group, the mean of the test results was 38.14 ± 5.32. The mean score among males was 31.31 ± 4.87 and among females 45.42 ± 9.54, with no significant difference in gender (P = 0.190). The difference in the OHIP49 test results between the control and experimental groups was also significant (P = 0.006). The difference in test results between men and women in both groups is also significant (0.032 according to ANOVA). Conclusion. According to the results of the research, it could be stated that the quality of life of people who require restoration of aesthetic and functional parameters of anterior teeth is significantly reduced compared to the quality of life of people who do not need it. The decline in quality of life is largely explained by more psychological than physical disorders associated with the imperfection of smiles and poor dental health of anterior teeth. This fact is also confirmed statistically


OHIP-49, change in quality of life, anterior teeth.


  1. Gazhva SI, Guluev RS, Gazhva YV. The quality of life in patients with diseases of oral cavity (review of literatute). Sovremennye problemy nauki o ibrazovania. 2012;4:1-9.
  2. Rufenacht CR. Morphopsychology. Fundamentals of Esthetics. Quintessence Publishing, Germany; 1990. p. 59-64.
  3. Antonov AN. Sotsialno-demograficheskie i motivatsionnye aspekty udovletvorennostiy stomatologicheskoi pomochiy v sovremennyh usloviyah. FGU “Institut povysheniya kvalifikatsii Federal’nogo mediko-biologicheskogo agentstva Rossii”. Moskwa: 2008. [in Russian].
  4. Goldstein RE. Esthetics in Dentistry. Hamilton, ON: DeckerInc; 1998. p. 3-15.
  5. Vodoriz YY, Marchenko IY, Shyndryk MA, Tkachenko IM. Review of treatment methods of patients with uncomplicated teeth fractures. Wiad Lek. 2018;71(7):1360-4.
  6. Tkachenko IM, Kovalenko VV, Skrypnikov PM, Vodoriz YY. Reasoning of adhesive system choice for treatment of patients with increased tooth wear. Wiad Lek. 2018;71(6):1129-34.
  7. Vodoriz YY, Tkachenko IM. Vyznachennya opory na zsuv restavratsiynyh materialiv pry rizniy glybyni preparuvannya tverdyh tkanyn zubiv frontalnoi grypy. Aktualnі problemi suchasnoyi medicini: Vіsnik ukraynskoyi medichnoyi stomatologіchnoy akademіi [Internet]. 2019;19(2):158-63. [in Ukrainian].
  8. Butova VG, Kovalsky VL. Predprenimatelskaya deyatelnost meditsinsкyh organizatsiy. Moskwa: STBOOK; 2006. s. 6-9. [in Russian].
  9. Smirnyagina VV. Vozmozhnost’ ispol’zovaniya kriteriya kachestva zhizni dlya otsenki effektivnosti lecheniya khronicheskogo generalizovannogo parodontita sredney tyazhesti. GOU VPO «Moskovskiy gosudarstvennyy mediko-stomatologicheskiy universitet Roszdrava»; Moskwa: 2007. 175 s. [in Russian].
  10. Khalyavina IN, Gileva YeS, Sadilova VA, Plenkina YuA, Khokhrin DV. Stomatologicheskoye zdorov’ye v kriteriyakh kachestva zhizni. Obshchestvennoye zdorov’ye i organizatsiya zdravookhraneniya. 2011;6–11. [in Russian].
  11. The WHOQOL group. What quality of life? World Health Forum [Internet]. 1996;354-6. Available from: http://www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/54358
  12. Slade GD, Sc BD, Ph D. The Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent Health. 1997;11:3-5.
  13. Deepan Kumar C, Mohamed S, Janakiram C, Joseph J. Validation of dental impact on daily living questionnaire among tribal population of India. Contemp Clin Dent [Internet]. 2015;6(6):235. Available from: http://www.contempclindent.org/text.asp?2015/6/6/235/166841
  14. Ramos-Jorge ML, Bosco VL, Peres MA, Nunes ACGP. The impact of treatment of dental trauma on the quality of life of adolescents – a casecontrol study in southern Brazil. Dent Traumatol. 2007;23(2):114-9.
  15. Vedeneva EV, Gurevich KG, Vagner VD. Svyaz’ klinicheskoy kartiny i kachestva zhizni u patsiyentov, obrashchayushchikhsya za esteticheskim stomatologicheskim lecheniyem. Stomatologiya dlya vsekh. 2009;4:4-6. [in Russian].

Publication of the article:

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 4 Part 1 (153), 2019 year, 296-300 pages, index UDK 616.314.3/4-0502:616-056.2:616-08